Hacker News Reader

Comment by robonerd | Hacker News Reader

I don't see why "What about innovation?" is taken seriously as an argument anyway. USB-C is more than adequate, we could coast with it for the next hundred years. Nobody is kept up at night by the lack of innovation in AC power plugs, the standards countries have settled on today, while not all equivalent, are all generally satisfactory in practice. Problem solved; stop fixing that which ain't broke and move on to other matters.

Yeah yeah, "640k should be enough for everybody". There comes a point where that is actually true.

View on HN

> I don't see why "What about innovation?" is taken seriously as an argument anyway.

because the USB-IF historically has struggled to reach enough consensus from its stakeholders to allow innovation to take place. The entire reason that lightning exists in the first place is because USB-IF couldn't agree on a replacement for micro-B (which everyone agreed clearly needed improvement!) and one of the members just had to shrug and go do it themselves. Once one of the members had gone there and proven the concept, it lit a fire under the asses of the rest of the consortium.

Same for why thunderbolt exists as a standard and not as USB 4 in the first place... not enough consensus to go there as an official standard rather than an extension. It took what, 10 years after Thunderbolt was standardized before we finally pulled ourselves out of the fecal lagoon of USB 3.x standards?

And then you layer in the dysfunction from the members that are primarily interested in creating consumer confusion with the USB 3.0, USB3.1 Type-1, USB 3.1 Type-2, USB 3.2 Type-1, USB 3.2 Type-2, USB 3.2 Type-2x2 nonsense so that they can deceptively and maliciously sell yesterday's hardware with tomorrow's standard on the box... many of the members of USB-IF are interested in actively stalling progress if it means they save 30 cents on their BOM.

This is not an organization with consumer interests at heart. They are a bad choice to be the legal guardian (more like, conservator) of all innovation.

Absolutely.

On top of that, I feel like USB-C is deliberately engineered to sell more ICs. Which wouldn't be that huge of an issue except as a result, all relevant ICs are sold out (or unsuitable).

CC/PD use a custom transmission standard so you can't implement it without a PHY, which basically means at least one dedicated IC.

Marker chips are 'optional' for USB-C, but essential for Lightning

You can also directly feed the needed voltage without the negotiation. So this is only partially true.

A compliant USB-C source will not provide more than 5V/3A without PD negotiation period, and is only guaranteed to provide default USB power. So if you can potentially draw more, you need to check whether it's allowed.

You need a chip in the power supply for that, but you already have a chip in the power supply because switching supplies are massively cheaper.

You don't need a marker chip in the cable unless you intend to go over 20V/3A.

I'm just talking about end devices here (source/sink).

Well you can still do USB2.0 over USB-C for all your low-speed, low-power gadgets.

Yeah, that's about the only thing you can do without ICs. 500mA max, high-speed lanes unused.

The entire reason for Lightning exists is increasing Apple revenues from selling cables and licences to OEMs.

>Gates himself has strenuously denied making the comment. In a newspaper column that he wrote in the mid-1990s, Gates responded to a student's question about the quote: "I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time." Later in the column, he added, "I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again."

This argument would sound less hollow if there weren’t two existing superior (from a user experience perspective) alternatives already on the market.

Apple’s Lightning (thinner than USB-C) and MagSafe (safer than USB-C for charging laptops… so glad Apple is transitioning back to it for M2 Airs)

Lightning cables don't last. They are a complete disaster. And that's not even considering how a little bit of dust can prevent your device from charging at all, and lightning ports are a complete dust magnet.

But the best argument against "what about lightning?" is the fact that Apple themselves don't use it on their higher powered devices like macs, and use USB-C instead.

Haven’t had any terrible experiences with lightning cables. I have several cables that are from 2016/2018 that I use regularly. But then again none of my type c cables go bad either… I think it would have been safer to say “from my experience <xyz>” instead of presenting your opinion as if it were more than just an opinion. I see how friends and family members treat their cables, tugging on the phone to disconnect instead of removing the cable by hand. Or placing the charger in a way that the cable is bent up against a piece of furniture. Regarding the lightning port, it’s actually quite easy to clean, compared to ports like usb-c (I’m guessing you know why that would be). Also using lightning on a Mac doesn’t make sense and that’s probably why they don’t do it.

I was never sure if it was dust causing my phone to refuse to charge or Apple's gatekeeping "official" cables. There used to be jailbreak tweaks that would allow unauthorized cables to suddenly start working fine, but the best I could do in iOS 14 was get a cable to maintain the battery (without charging it). Perhaps Apple is shooting their own standard in the foot simply by enforcing their certification program.

That said, you're absolutely right that its limit is reached already with phones. Some old cables have two pins (presumably VDD) that are discolored from use. Would not want lightning for charging a laptop.

All these arguments are the same I use… against USB-C.

I had 2 Google Pixels before with USB-C and both died because dust would accumulate around the center thingy and it was impossible to clean. The center thingy actually became loose on my second Pixel and the connector wouldn’t hold in place anymore.

I have since switched to an iPhone and I think the lightning connector stays remarkably clean. It’s also easier to clean because it doesn’t have the center piece of USB-C connectors.

All these arguments have nothing to do with the new legislation. Should there be laws to enforce “better” options? Then phones should have mil-spec round connectors. I insist I don’t understand what problem is the law supposed to solve.

> Lightning cables don't last.

This has absolutely zero to do with the plug design of Lightning. There are crap cables for USB-A, USB-C, USB Micro, 3.5" audio, and any other standard you want to find that don't last.

> And that's not even considering how a little bit of dust can prevent your device from charging at all, and lightning ports are a complete dust magnet.

By what magic do you believe that lightning ports collect pocket lint that USB-C is immune to?

> But the best argument against "what about lightning?" is the fact that Apple themselves don't use it on their higher powered devices like macs, and use USB-C instead.

Nobody is making this point. They're saying the sheer existence of the Lightning plug lit a fire under the USB-IF to finish and greenlight USB-C. If Apple hadn't started producing Lightning devices, it's entirely possible we'd still be dealing with USB Micro.

That said, I'll happily die on the hill that the Lightning plug design is almost unilaterally superior to the USB-C plug design.

Anker lighting cables last pretty well. I agree the Apple ones don't.

Lightning only ever managed to coast by because of its slim form-factor and because Apple mandated its use. It's capable of USB2.0 at most (480Mbps), whereas USB-C can do 20Gbps today and 40Gbps when using Thunderbolt.

MagSafe on phones is a total joke, and MagSafe on laptops exists _alongside_ USB-C charging.

> It's capable of USB2.0 at most (480Mbps),

the lightning connector itself is capable of USB 3.0 speeds, apple just keeps the iphone line (or the cables?) at usb 2.0 spec. The ipad pro can reach full speed.

https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Lightning_to_USB_3_Camera_Adap...

I don’t get how they justify those speeds, especially without good wireless experience (not icloud and not airdrop)

MagSafe (aka wireless one) is okay(tho half the speed) if you ain’t got carplay.

For mac magsafe used to break every year where braided usb-c cable lasted me 3 years.

I'll add to the chorus saying lightning is terrible. I have a mix of devices using lightning and USB-C. I have had zero issues with USB-C, in fact I still charge my phone every night with the USB-C cable that came with my Pixel 1. I've never had to replace a single one, so much so that I have a nest of spare, unused, USB-C cables in a drawer. Meanwhile, lightning cables are a continuous roulette of failure - I would guess I've purchased at least a dozen replacement lightning cables over that same time period.

"thinner" is not a universally superior quality. It also means "more likely to get bent or broken" which implies "more likely to need replacing" which is one of the direct aims of this legislation.

Lightning is sturdier than USB-C too.

I have literally never seen or heard of a Lightning plug or port "getting bent or broken". However I have heard of the hidden-male-inside-of-female port of on-device USB-C ports breaking at which point your device is trash.

Well my anecdotal experience is exactly opposite yours, so let's reference the Apple product page as data instead:

"Apple’s lightning-cable product page contains over 2,300 negative reviews of the lightning cable, with an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars"

I assume that's mostly complaints about the cable insulation rather than the connector.

Lightning connectors do have the advantage you can safely stick a toothpick in them to remove lint, I don't know if lint building up inside the socket is a problem specific to lightning though.

I used both Lightning and USB-C cables, I had two Lightning cables dying from oxidation (not misuse in water or anything, normal use) and not a single USB-C problem so far.

Calling Lightning superior is blatant Apple fanboyism.

Lightning isn't as fast as USB 3.0 (which USB C cables should support), and can't supply as much power as USB-PD (which, again, works over USB C cables)

The vast majority of USB-C cables only support 480 mbps data transfer rate, for cost and because they are primarily meant for charging.

So in the 15 years since micro-USB was developed, that is just one vendor which has been able to produce something better, and it happens to be the most valuable corporation in the world with access to economics of scale that no other manufacturer could compete with. Are you saying that's a valid justification that allowing manufacturers the freedom to innovate on charging ports is more important than interoperability?

And your argument is that because innovation has, arguably, slowed (not even halted!) you are happy mandating the current standard.

It's a good thing there is so little innovation coming out of the EU or else their wreckless legislators could have actual impact.

Yes, exactly: the tiny amount of genuine innovation that exists in this particular area is not worth giving up interoperability and regressing back to the pre-micro-USB world of mostly terrible, rarely innovative proprietary connectors from every different vendor.

> their wreckless legislators could have actual impact.

I think the positive impact of the currently existing micro-USB legislation is clear if you look back at the status quo before it existed. This new legislation simply improves upon it.

Lightning is a decent cable technology from a form factor position, but it has several technology drawbacks. First each lightning device (including cables) have to pay a nontrivial royalty to apple bringing up the minimum cost of accessories. Secondly the standard is limited to relatively low power and data rates.

Notice also that nothing prevents apple from additionally shipping MagSafe on their laptops, the device just needs to be usable with a type-C charger.

They can make both. One for the standard and the other for their own. Or engineer their new port and ship an adapter/extra cable.

I don't think they can. The legislation explicitly mandates usb-c as the device port. Sure, Apple can engineer their own proprietary-to-usbc adapter and ship it with their phones, but they will no longer be allowed to use a non-usbc port on the phone itself.

From https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/6988... , page 6:

Device-side connector: the included devices would have to be equipped with a USB-C receptacle on the device side (as described in the European standard EN IEC 62680-1-3:2021) and, in cases of charging power lower than 60 watts, be rechargeable with cables that complied with the same standard

Then on page 8, the latest expansion of scope:

Included devices: a larger range of small and medium-sized devices with power delivery up to 100 watts would be included under the scope of the directive, including e-readers, low-powered laptops, keyboards, mice, earbuds, screens, printers, portable navigations, smartwatches, personal care devices and electronic toys

Note the personal care devices: looks like this is going to include electronic toothbrushes and electric razors.

Lightning isn’t thinner than USB-C when you compare the size of the sockets.

> Nobody is kept up at night by the lack of innovation in AC power plugs

Mandatory Tom Scott video about bri'ish power plugs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEfP1OKKz_Q

:-)

That's a good overview of the features of UK plugs, but a terrible one for establishing the supposed superiority of the UK design.

Much of what he describes is e.g. a feature of Schuko plugs/sockets.

The main distinguishing feature of the UK design is a technical workaround for a problem that no longer exists (WWII copper shortage requiring the embedded fuse).

I like US plugs. Sure, it's easier to shock yourself with them, but you usually only do that once (because it feels bad, not because it's often fatal).

I like them because they're small. I have a nifty little 3-port USB-A/C power supply where the plug folds flush. Europlug would have trouble doing that, and it's outright impossible with Schuko and UK plugs.

I have a nifty little 3-port USB-A/C power supply where the plug folds flush. ...

and it's outright impossible with Schuko and UK plugs

You mean exactly like this folding UK adapter from Apple? :P

https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MGMY3B/A/apple-5w-usb-...

Other folding UK plug brands are available. /bbc_announcer_voice

That's the closest I've seen. There's still a huge amount of bulk devoted to the plug, but that does fold flat.

NZ plugs are small and don’t fall out. Best part is you can convert US plugs to NZ with a pair of pliers.

British plugs are the only thing I will ever get nationalistic about. They’re great.

Hurt like a sod to stand on if the prongs are face up though!

Being in an ex British colony it's one of the good things left to us from that time but unfortunately it means we need adaptors wherever we travel.

Except that they're huge.

Can't the same safety features fit in a smaller package?

"The live is brown because that's the colour your trousers will go if you touch it."

Wonderful! :D

We had to leave to EU to get those much safer 3 pin plugs we had since 1911.

https://inews.co.uk/video/lbc-caller-three-pin-plugs-236449

To be totally fair, it's not like a phone manufacturer is going to put 2 different ports on their device, so this is essentially regulating data as well as power. But also to be fair, USB-C cables that support thunderbolt 3 are a couple orders of magnitude faster (throughput) than Apple's lightning cables (40 Gbps vs ~480 Mbps), and if Apple could possibly support such speeds without releasing a new backwards-incompatible cable, they would have done so long ago.

If Apple ever wanted to support faster than 40 Gbps, they would have to do so in concert with the rest of the tech industry and release it as an open standard. I'd like to hear somebody try to argue this is a bad thing.

> But also to be fair, USB-C cables that support thunderbolt 3 are a couple orders of magnitude faster (throughput) than Apple's lightning cables (40 Gbps vs ~480 Mbps)

however, extremely few devices ship capable of these data rates, and many USB-C cables ship only supporting 480 mbps data transfer.

> ... Apple could possibly support such speeds without releasing a new backwards-incompatible cable, they would have done so long ago.

Lightning supports USB 3 (superspeed 5gbps) speeds. The lightning USB 3 camera adapter supports it for compatible devices. They did indeed figure this out long ago. They didn't do it because most people don't use lightning cables for data or even understand they _could_ use lightning cables for data.

> If Apple ever wanted to support faster than 40 Gbps, they would have to do so in concert with the rest of the tech industry and release it as an open standard. I'd like to hear somebody try to argue this is a bad thing.

Apple contributed to both thunderbolt iterations and to USB4. They were first adopters of both, as well as shipping the first USB-C laptop. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

When they started this in 2009 they did want to make micro usb the thing everybody was forced to use.

It's only by luck that it took enough time to not get stuck on that...

Contrarily, if they were able to pass that standard quickly, it would stand to reason that they could also pass a USB-C standard quickly.

USB-C becoming standardized for phones will not slow the advancement of USB specs, and if the physical form factor becomes a constraint somehow, they will devise a better one and will standardize it likewise, even if consumer model phones can't ship with them from day 0.

A great example of this is EV charging connectors. The Tesla spec was superior until recently, but because the EU has mandated CCS, as communication/payment has been implemented within the standard, European cars find themselves with a universal plug and a universal charging network that can be unilaterally improved.

Meanwhile in the US we now have 2 charging networks on 2 standards, and no real path to unification.

The Tesla spec still is superior. Europeans just don't get its benefits anymore. The CCS mandate was mostly protectionism and I strongly doubt it would have happened if Tesla were headquartered in Germany.

How is it mostly protectionism?

There are currently three different fast charging standards, Tesla’s, CCS, and Chademo, and a vast need for improvements in charging infrastructure. If you don’t have a common standard, you end up with a fragmented network that caps everyone’s utility. Imagine if ICE cars could only get gas from certain types of stations, it’s madness.

> How is it mostly protectionism?

Seriously? The clear leader for a decade has been Tesla, which is based in the US.

Chademo also has a lot of traction and is dominant in Japan and parts of east Asia.

CCS is popular in Europe (along with Tesla).

The EU mandated that all must use CCS, which has never been dominant in terms of technology or market share. It's blatant protectionism.

Are you saying that there already was a large, established CCS production base in Europe at the time the standard was introduced? Otherwise, what were they protecting?

They were protecting their comparatively technologically uninspired local companies from Tesla, which was on course to dominating the market.

Tesla was not dominating. It was just moving early and had momentum because of that. I do not see evidence that the tesla charger is superior or CCS inferior.

MagSafe-style charging connectors are an innovation that, IMO, justifies breaking compatibility. I dislike this forced standardization on USB-C because USB-3/USB-C is a user-hostile nightmare standard.

> the lack of innovation in AC power plugs

Having lived in a country (Thailand) where both Euro and US plugs work just fine as long as you mind your voltage, I have become quite annoyed at that lack of innovation.

In Thailand I became quite annoyed by the lack of grounding. If your sockets where actually modern enough to have ground, it is rarely connected to anything at all, or sometimes just screwed to the wall. Rare to find a ground spike in a dwelling. Common to get zapped by your shower's electric water heater.

My place in Bangkok is a nice modern luxury building... at least it was luxury when they built it 17 years ago, now it's falling apart a bit but the amenities are awesome. The electric is probably grounded straight into the Chao Phraya river. :-)

How could both be compatible? US plugs are meant operate at 120 volts, EU at 240. I don't see how both could be supported safely.

> as long as you mind your voltage

It's not the plugs, it's the devices (or more commonly now, the power adapters) that work with 120, 240, or however many volts.

Nowadays many (most?) things take both voltages or, AFAICT -- I'm no electrician! -- anything reasonably close.

So in Thailand, for the most part, you can just plug in your MacBook or whatever and you don't need an adapter for the plug itself. Of course, if you're wrong about the voltage, things might go bad.

And as the other reply noted, this convenience doesn't make it safer, quite the opposite. But I just generally have realized there's a lot of innovation that could be done in plugs and sockets, but isn't being done.

As someone else commented above, the UK plugs are really interesting... but in my opinion maddeningly, unnecessarily big.

Not sure how a technologist could think that USB-C is the best that we could do. It could be smaller, easier to attach in the dark, easier to attach with one hand, etc. etc.

The government is not good at technology. They should step out of the way and let the consumer decide.

Well, there are some serious drawbacks to USB-C. For one, it's not IP rated, which means you cannot use it to charge anything in a bathroom or a kitchen. That's a shame because there are a lot of appliances like electric toothbrushes that would also benefit from a single plug.

The innovation was primarily financial innovation in taking money unnecessarily from your customers, except for a very few cases. Lightning was a good cable in the early days, but but then became a financial windfall for apple of course.

What a shock, the European argument is "But why do you need so much innovation?" Pretty much summarizes their place in the world in a nutshell.

Lmfao, I've never been outside America or Canada. I'll take you calling me European as a compliment though.

> There comes a point where that is actually true.

Like IPv6

Reply on news.ycombinator.com